Should US apologize for financing radicalization of Afghan children in 1970s-80s?

Should US apologize for financing radicalization of Afghan children in 1970s-80s?

Or that was the right thing to do at the time to fight Russians in a proxy war without risking lives of our own men in a direct war with Russia to contain spread of communism?

Afghanistan of 2017

Shabana Basij-Rasikh, a 2014 National Geographic Explorer, wants to bring an end to the “bacha posh” tradition in Afghanistan.
The Hidden Girls of Afghanistan In Afghanistan, a mother explains why she dresses her 9-year old daughter as a boy.

By Casey Smith
PUBLISHED June 19, 2017

As a child, Basij-Rasikh dressed as a boy to walk to school in Taliban-held Afghanistan where no schools existed for girls. The practice is known as “bacha posh”—the literal translation from Dari is used to describe a girl “dressed like a boy” in Afghanistan. (Read “Afghan Woman Who Once Went to School in Disguise opens Boarding School for Girls”)

Radicalization problem was not tackled well by DGP, and no clear policy vision/financial commitments from Trump so far to fight violent extremism:

Why Women Are Crucial to Fighting Radicalization in Afghanistan

Mariam Safi is one of just a handful of researchers focusing on the role of women in post-conflict peace building in Afghanistan. As part of our “Women and Jihad” series, she tells us about the pivotal role women can play in combating the Taliban.

Afghan women attend a lecture titled “Necessities of Permanent Peace,” organized by the Afghanistan Women’s Council in Kabul in 2008. As the main decision-makers in Afghan families, women can be a powerful force in the fight against radicalization. AP/Musadeq Sadeq After the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the Afghan public hoped that decades of conflict and tragedy were coming to an end. But change was slow to materialize, and many saw their situation get worse, not better. When the Taliban started fighting back, many civilians felt so disillusioned with the peace process that their support for the insurgency grew.
Mariam Safi is one of the few female researchers and experts from Afghanistan focusing on the role of women in post-conflict peace building and countering violent extremism. As deputy director of the Centre for Conflict and Peace Studies in Kabul, she has produced research highlighting the crucial role women have played with regard to the Taliban, including convincing family members not to sign up to fight. She says the fact that women are key figures in community and family settings in Afghanistan means they are also crucial to counter-extremism work.
Women & Girls spoke to Safi about how efforts to tackle extremism should start in the home.Women & Girls: What are we talking about when we say “violent extremism” in the Afghan context?

Mariam Safi: There are lots of active [extremist] groups, and we’re just in the process of trying to identify them and the different variations and the fine lines between them. It’s not entirely clear right now, because the research is very limited.

Other - Yes, the US should apologize, no radicalization of children is not always immoral

There are circumstances in which the policy the US pursued would have been justified. In the actual circumstances, it wasn't, IMO.

That is interesting take.
A follow up question. Given such circumstances, radicalization of just foreign children can be morally done or US government could radicalize American children too?
If you can cite a real or hypothetical circumstance where it would be moral for US government to do so, would help understand your view.

A follow up question. Given such circumstances, radicalization of just foreign children can be morally done or US government could radicalize American children too?

People are people, so yes, doesn't matter whether foreign or American.

It's a moral cost-benefit analysis. Suppose Ancapia is being invaded by Genocideville. Ancapia can end the war easily in 1 day at the cost of 1 innocent life (someone who will be caught in the crossfire). Alternatively, Genocideville will conquer Ancapia and exterminate the entire population. What should be done? ..the answer is obvious, no?

In most real situation, of course, the answer is much less obvious, much there still has to be an answer; trade-offs must be made.

If you can cite a real or hypothetical circumstance where it would be moral for US government to do so, would help understand your view.

Suppose some children in some country are being indoctrinated in violent revolutionary communism.

And the US is in position to indoctrinate them instead in moderate democratic socialism, and only that doctrine.

Which is less bad?

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

True. It would also be mandadtory part of any curriculum on Neoconism 101.

Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0

People are people, so yes, doesn't matter whether foreign or American.

It's a moral cost-benefit analysis. Suppose Ancapia is being invaded by Genocideville. Ancapia can end the war easily in 1 day at the cost of 1 innocent life (someone who will be caught in the crossfire). Alternatively, Genocideville will conquer Ancapia and exterminate the entire population. What should be done? ..the answer is obvious, no?

In most real situation, of course, the answer is much less obvious, much there still has to be an answer; trade-offs must be made.

Suppose some children in some country are being indoctrinated in violent revolutionary communism.

And the US is in position to indoctrinate them instead in moderate democratic socialism, and only that doctrine.

Which is less bad?

Ok, if I'm reading it right, in your first hypothetical example indigenous people of a land can morally radicalize their children to fight "mother of all violence" type or WMD armed invaders.

Second example does not to fit in current context as we are not talking about moderate indoctrination but violent extremist radicalization of this type: